Socrates Definition Of Good

Socrates was a revolutionary philosopher whom at his time challenged society. He was a man of questions. When in conversation with others, he would merely answer questions with more questions of his own. When asking others questions to their questions, it not only helped him try to understand their point of view, but also helped him strengthen and guide his argument as well as weaken their own. As Socrates questioned other philosophers on justice, it helped make his argument strong that justice is a good in itself. He was able to disprove others definitions, while defining justice himself using an example of an ideal city as well as what makes a soul for an individual.

Plato’s Republic gives four definitions of justice by four different characters. …show more content…
If something is good for its own self, it can be said it is intrinsically good. It is done for its own good, not for further benefit. If something is good in itself and for its consequences, it is done for the benefit of the outcome as well as for its own good. If something is good only for its consequences, it is done only for the benefit of the outcome. Examples of the three classes of good would be eating candy, shopping, and studying. Eating candy is only good for its own good. You eat the candy and enjoy it. Shopping is an example of doing something for its own good and for the further benefits. When you shop, you have fun and gain new clothing in the process. Studying is an example of something that is good only for its consequences. It is not fun to do, but the benefit of completing it is more knowledge. Glaucon views justice as something that is done for the good generated by it. He believes people are hesitant to be just as they don’t want to do it for its own purpose, but rather only do it for the benefit of the outcomes. In society, a fear is created that makes people be just. People are worried of punishment if they are not just. And people want to be treated with just so being just themselves creates an environment where people in return will be just to …show more content…
“Isn’t everything that has to do with virtue the same in both? Necessarily. Moreover, Glaucon, I suppose we’ll say that a man is just in the same way as a city. That too is entirely necessary. And we surely haven’t forgotten that the city was just because each of the three classes in it was doing its own work. I don’t think we could forget that. Then we must also remember that each one of us in whom each part is doing its own work will himself be just and do his own“. If the different individual parts of a city or soul were to do other jobs, or were on different hierarch levels, the city or soul would not function properly. This dysfunctionality amongst the parts would cause an unhealthy city or soul, and therefore be considered injustice. If the different parts complete their own tasks and stay in the right hierarchy levels, they work well amongst each other and create a healthy soul or city. This would be considered justice. As this is what an individual would want, a healthy soul, they desire justice. Justice can then be said it is a good in itself. You want justice for its